Thank you, and good morning to everybody joining today's call. I'll start by going through the financial results, and then I'll pass over to Jim Clayton, our CEO, who will provide an operational and strategic update. I'd like to start our presentation today by acknowledging and paying respects to the traditional custodians on whose land we meet today. I'd like to pay respect to their elders, past and present, and further extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders joining us today. We celebrate their continuing connection to and custodianship of this country. Now turning to the results and starting on slide four, 2025 was a solid year of performance with double-digit top-line growth, delivering record sales of nearly $1.7 billion. Pleasingly, this number was supported by double-digit revenue growth in all three theatres and another strong performance from the coffee category. The group's full-year EBIT of $204.6 million was at the top end of our guidance given in February, as we successfully navigated the first wave of turbulence from the evolving U.S. tariff regime and successfully aligned our operating expenses to gross profits to deliver double-digit EBIT growth of 10.2%. Our pull forward of inventory in the U.S. pre-April 2025, before the significant increase in tariffs, helped secure this result. Associated and incremental storage, transport, engineering, and interest costs were all absorbed within this reported 2025 delivery. Our underlying cash flow was healthy, allowing us to maintain a net cash position, notwithstanding the build in U.S. inventory and the first wave of CapEx investments in diversifying our manufacturing base, a move accelerated by the emerging tariff reality. NPAT grew at 14.6%, with lower average borrowing and interest costs across the year. A fully franked dividend of $0.19 will be paid in early October, with a full-year dividend of $0.37, 12.1% above the prior year. Overall, a very solid year of performance against a rapidly changing backdrop. Turning to slide five, we see our key segment results. Here, the global products segment grew revenue by 12.3% or 11.4% in constant currency, with gross profits growing by 11.1% year-on-year. Our new products landed well, with the Oracle Jet, Lux Brewer Thermal, the Smart Oven Airfryer Compact, and premium coffee accessories all performing strongly. As we announced at the half-year, the exciting and potentially very large markets of China and the Middle East were also entered as new direct markets in the second half of FY25. In category terms, coffee delivered strong double-digit growth across the year, and indeed in both halves. Cooking achieved high single-digit growth, while food preparation grew gross margin but posted a small single-digit revenue decline. Gross margin in the global segment was slightly dampened by the weaker AUD and elevated EMEA shipping costs, but gross profits grew strongly. Our distribution segment fulfilled its strategic role by delivering strong gross margin growth and increasing gross profit of $7.7 million. Turning to slide six, here we see our geographic performances, with all three of our theatres delivering double-digit revenue growth. In the Americas, our largest region, the U.S. consumer remained encouragingly resilient, whilst Canada rebased as Hudson Bay left the playing field. Revenue grew 11.5% in constant currency terms, with both coffee and cooking in double-digit growth. In EMEA, another strong coffee performance led to a 12% constant currency growth in revenue. Our key countries all performed well, and our direct entry into the Middle East got off to a solid start, although the business model changeover created a transitional headwind for the second half in the theatre. In APAC, we saw robust growth of 10.7% in constant currency, with ANZ delivering double-digit growth and South Korea continuing to move from strength to strength. As I said, our China entry shows early promise, with the previous distributor changeout acting as an expected temporary drag on reported second-half growth. Turning to slide seven, here we have a look at our EBIT growth drivers across FY25. Pleasingly, gross profit grew at a more normal cadence, up 11.4% or $63.5 million on FY24, allowing a 12% increase in investment in operating expenses while still delivering double-digit EBIT growth. We increased our investment in employee expenses by $16.1 million or 8.2%, led by annual pay rises, geographic expansion, and selected headcount growth in the key investment functions. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased in line with our plan by $7.5 million or 12.6% due to the acceleration in the rate of our new product launches. Our elevated FY25 investment into diversified manufacturing and storing stores will start amortizing next year as assets are brought into use, and is expected to lead to a further budgeted acceleration in D&A in FY26. Marketing and advertising investment increased by $7.9 million or 14.5%, behind key launches and initiatives. Finally, premises and other expenses were up $13 million, driven by temporary storage costs and engineering fees associated with the U.S. tariff mitigation, as well as some foreign exchange losses. In aggregate, when we look at the total, we aligned our operating expenses growth to gross profit growth and delivered double-digit EBIT growth of 10.2%. Within this OpEx growth, the critical functions of marketing, R&D, technology services, and solutions were prioritized and increased to 14.2% of sales from 14.0% in the prior period. Turning to slide eight and the balance sheet, it's a story of healthy underlying cash flow delivering a net cash position, notwithstanding the necessary tariff-related incidents of pulling forward inventory in the U.S. and investing in the first wave of CapEx related to diversifying our manufacturing footprint. The $93 million inventory growth here was led by this U.S. pull forward, with inventory outside of the U.S.A. broadly flat as a percentage of revenue and in equilibrium. Receivables were normal, with days outstanding in line with the prior year. In terms of fixed assets, FY24 saw an increase in investment in fixed assets, all funded within the net cash position of $485 million at the year-end. The PPE increase seen here includes $21.4 million of tooling and assets associated with the acceleration of our diversified manufacturing footprint, as well as $5.1 million related to storing store expansion with key retailers. Pleasingly, our capitalized development costs and software continue to grow, led by a healthy pipeline of new product development and solutions now including specialty coffee projects. Finally, the movement in goodwill brands and licenses is accounted for by some foreign exchange translation effects, as well as the purchase of an exclusive license for third-party developed technology that we plan to use in our future product development. Looking forward into FY26, our balance sheet is healthy. We start the year in a net cash position, and we have unused debt facilities in place for our normal seasonal working capital investments, as well as further investment in our diversifying manufacturing footprint and funding other opportunities as they may arise. Now to slide nine, and before passing over to Jim, a few remarks on the outlook for FY26 and the potential impact of U.S. tariffs. I think we've covered FY25, but just to reiterate, the bulk of the COGS impact from increasing tariffs was mitigated by the pull forward of inventory at pre-tariff prices, and the various costs associated with this tactical move were absorbed into the reported FY25 delivery, which still came out at the top end of guidance. Looking forward into FY26, most of our markets feel normal, with macroeconomic headwinds playing against Breville-specific tailwinds. The tariff turbulence and excitement is contained to one market; it's just that it's our largest single country. In the U.S., although the memories of the shock 145% tariff rates seem to have faded, we should be clear that the current fact set, the current rates that apply to China and now more generally to the world, represent a material one-time increase in input costs. This represents a structural step up in input costs, akin to a consumption tax, that we now need to proactively manage, and we are proactively managing. We are working hard to mitigate the impacts of these new tariffs, including, as I've spoken about, diversifying our manufacturing footprint, which is going well, working on our FOBs, our unit costs from our suppliers, making distribution channel adjustments, and taking price where appropriate. With so many variables, including, in my opinion, tariff rates by no means completely fixed and certain, and price elasticity is still unproven, it is too early to tell how things will play out over the next 12 to 18 months and what the net impact of these changes will be. However, consistent with our normal practice, we currently expect to be able to give guidance with our first half results. I hope that that outlines where we are with tariffs today, what we know, and what remains uncertain, as well as laying out how we have performed against a challenging backdrop to deliver very solid results in FY25. With that, I'll hand over to Jim. Thanks, Martin, and good morning to everyone. Now that Martin has walked you through our FY25 results, I'll step you through an operational update, hitting our manufacturing diversification program, new products and solutions expansion, and geographic expansion. Turning to slide 11, for any given product, say a toaster, we have two core variants: a 120-volt version and a 240-volt version. The 120-volt version is sold in North America, and the 240-volt version is sold in EMEA, APAC, and most of South America. From a manufacturing perspective, we are adding geographic diversification to our manufacturing footprint by transitioning our 120-volt variant, again the one sold in North America, to Southeast Asia and Mexico. Manufacturing for our 240-volt variant will remain in China unchanged. This near-shoring exercise is a natural progression of growth and size. Breville Group's current scale enables production to be split in half. Years from now, when we are much larger, we'll likely split EMEA and APAC production as well. When we started this program, only 15% of U.S. gross profit dollars were derived from products not manufactured in China. Given that we are well into our diversification program and moving at pace, as of today, this number has increased to 65%. By the end of the first half of 2026, we expect that roughly 80% of U.S. gross profit dollars will come from products manufactured outside of China. It takes quite a bit of effort and coordination to develop new manufacturing sites. While the team has made significant progress in a short period of time, this program will extend into the second half of 2026 as well as 2027, as we work through the tail of the U.S. product portfolio. On to slide 12, now on to new products and solution expansion. Slide 13, see last month we launched our new Oracle Dual Boiler in ANZ. Building off our battle-tested and well-respected Oracle platform, the product team has launched our most advanced coffee machine to date. It delivers the automation of café quality at home for ultimate convenience, and it also gives you complete manual control for those who want to do it themselves. Slide 14, with a simple swipe of the screen, you switch between fully automated to fully manual. In manual mode, you control the grind setting, the temperature, the pre-infusion time, the bloom time, and the shot time. The Oracle Dual Boiler is Wi-Fi connected and comes with a companion app. This app lets you start the machine from your bedroom in the morning, so the boilers are ready to go by the time you get to the kitchen. As with the Oracle Jet, the Wi-Fi platform enables the pushing of new updated features to the product over its lifetime. On slide 15, you'd see that in the second half of 2025, we launched the new Lux Brewer for batch brew customers. This product comes in the Lux color range and delivers an SCA Gold Cup at the touch of a button, whether that be a single cup or 12 cups. It can deliver cold brew in as little as 30 minutes. In its custom settings section, the user has complete control over all the brewing steps to deliver unique flavor profiles from the coffee bean. Slide 16, this month Baratza will be launching the Encore ESP Pro. This is a compelling step forward, leveraging the patent-pending ESP grind adjustment mechanism. The Pro offers stepless grind adjustments across a wide range, across a much wider range, enabling you to perfectly dial in any coffee for espresso, coupled with deionization to minimize static. Along with its accessories, it is designed to support any workflow from single dosing espresso to batch dosing for drip coffee or cold brew. Taken together, the Oracle Dual Boiler, the Lux Brewer, and the Encore ESP Pro, these products extend our leadership in both home cafe and batch brewing formats, ensuring we meet consumers across a spectrum of price points, coffee preferences, and experience levels. Slide 17, Smart Oven Airfryer Compact brings the capabilities of our market-leading larger ovens into a compact footprint for smaller countertops. It leads with presets for typical snack foods, as well as air frying. Most importantly, it's supported by the Breville Plus companion app, giving hundreds of optimized guides and recipes to enable our customers to get the most out of their oven. Slide 18, Solution Platforms made quite a bit of progress in FY2025. The Breville Plus app added over 1,000 new recipes and quick guides, brought on Le Creuset as a new content partner, and extended the service to the Canadian market. Beans continues to expand globally with its entry into Germany and deepened partner integrations under the Powered by Beans service model with Williams Sonoma, Crate & Barrel, John Lewis, and AeroPress joining in FY2025. Slide 19, FY2025 was also a busy year for geographic expansion. The Breville brand went live in China towards the end of the second half of 2025 and we're off to a good start. We've launched our brand stores on the important digital platforms, and we have great partners supporting our execution. In EMEA, Sage went direct into the Middle East at the beginning of the second half of 2025. All our platforms are now live in the region, and the handoff from our long-time distribution partner has gone well. Early days, but all looks to be on plan. Slide 20, I'm selling a touch of futures here, but Baratza will be going direct in Korea in the first half of 2026. As a small update on our Korean execution, we recently launched our store-in-store in Shinsegae in Gangnam, the number one department store location in Korea. That location is performing particularly well. Our Korean team also received the Experiential Store of the Year award from Retail Asia, another validation point for the quality of our execution as a premium brand. Slide 21, closing off, I'm quite proud of what the team accomplished in FY2025. In a challenging environment, including the first wave of tariff impacts in the U.S., it grew gross profit by 11%, kept the balance sheet in a net cash position, and continued driving progress across the four growth levers. Another year of short-term tactics execution coupled with steady long-term strategy execution. For FY2026, we will continue our metronomic execution of our long-term strategy while managing around or through near-term turbulence. With that, I'll now hand the call back to the moderator and open the call for any questions you might have about our FY2025 results. Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you'd like to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speaker phone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. We ask that all participants limit their questions to one per turn. If you have any further questions, you'll need to rejoin the queue. Your first question today comes from Tom Keirath from Montgomery Investment Management. Please go ahead. Oh, good morning, guys. We've noticed a bunch of your competitors have taken price over the past few months in the U.S. Just be interested in when you're thinking of taking price and maybe the level or any kind of demand elasticity kind of thoughts that you have at this time based on where the tariffs are at the moment. Thanks. Sure. We've already taken price on some SKUs. I think that happened maybe three weeks ago, four weeks ago, something. Late July, late July. I think what you'll see across the competitive set is that this is a decision that's made at the SKU level. Across at least what we're seeing across the competitive sets, some SKUs have changed, some SKUs haven't, same here. This game of where and how you use the price lever really does come down to the individual SKU level as well as your kind of midterm, long-term strategy. is interesting to follow on. Go ahead. I was just going to say, when you have lifted, what's the sort of demand elasticity? Is that within your expectations, or does it temper your expectations around more price potentially as you shift the production to other countries where the costs are a little higher? I'm not quite sure I totally understand the last of that question, but the answer on elasticity is you find out. You change price and then you watch. We learned quite a bit about elasticity on some of our SKUs during. During the post-COVID period. It was actually the first Trump tariff regime that went through some time back. At least for the SKUs that were impacted then, we learned a little bit about elasticity. Basically, what you do is you take your best judgment, you make the change, and then you start watching the data. The data will tell you what elasticity is, and then you've earned the right to make another decision as you see that play out. I wouldn't say I have expectations because you shouldn't. It's more of a process than anything else. To reiterate what Jim said, Tom, those increases that we took were in late July. We've seen three weeks of unit sales. Some are showing elasticity, some aren't, but it's too short a period to really judge it at this stage. Understood. Great. Thanks, Martin. Thanks, Jim. Thank you. Your next question comes from James Lee from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hey, guys, can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Awesome. Just a quick question on the U.S. distributor change. I know it was an impact into the second half of 2025. Is there any lingering impact we should expect into 2026? Yeah. Okay, James, that may have been my language. It wasn't a distributor change. I talked about some changes in distribution channels, which means the weighting of some of our higher margin channels we've lent into, and some of our lower margin channels we've gone lighter on as one of the ways to mitigate the tariff impact. For example, some of our SKUs will be going only to pure play online distributors, customers, if you prefer. It wasn't flagging an overall distributor change in the U.S. It was just saying a channel weighting was going to change in 2026 versus 2025. Sorry, and to clarify on China moving away from a distributor, was there any lingering impact into 2026? I'm sorry, I misheard. I thought you asked. You said the U.S. USA. Sorry, no. No, no, no. On China, you absorb it. All of that's absorbed in 2025. Yeah. We're direct now, so. Yeah, that changeover is through. Yeah, every time you go through a change in distribution, you have about a 12-month headwind while you cut off orders to the distributor while you're lining up to go direct, and then you go direct. That sucking sound, so to speak, for both the Middle East and China is buried in the FY2025 numbers. Great, thank you very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sean Zhu from CLSA. Please go ahead. Morning, team. Thanks for taking my question. I've got a question specific for China. You might be aware that the national subsidy policy, including coffee machine brands starting this year in China, is part of the home appliance trading and the consumption incentive program. My understanding is that's expected to run till the end of the year, and most of your competitor brands, multinational organizations, and domestic Chinese coffee machine brands are all eligible under this policy. I'm just curious to know if there's any plan for you guys to join the program soon because I think Breville Group is a good brand image brand building in China, but also that's a quite big incentive in terms of the cash subsidy. Please, thank you. What I can tell you, as of now, we've chosen not to participate. That decision could change over this period, but as of right now, this is partly because we just went live at the end of the second half, and we need to let the team get settled at some level. We're playing a much longer-term game as we enter new markets like China. I'm less moved by some little near-term opportunity of a kick that I could drive through that program. Right now, we've decided not to participate. Sorry, can I just get a quick follow-up? I understand this is a long-term play, but in the short run, I feel like this is a free kick. Is there any specific reason why you're not choosing to pursue this opportunity? Is it to do with some compliance or process, or can we please get a bit more color on this, please? It's more of a long-term strategic market entry decision. I don't want to go into too much detail, but we had the discussion, we weighed out the pros and cons, and we came to the conclusion that with what we want to get accomplished in our first year in China, we've decided not to participate. Yeah, got it. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Craig Robinson from MSA Market. Please go ahead. Good morning, Jim and Martin. Can I just ask a question about the mitigants you're pursuing to obviously offset the tariffs? FOB reductions, do you have any comments on what you're seeing there? What I'm wrestling with is it's logical and sensible fundamentally to diversify that manufacturing, but will there be any sort of disruptions or wobbles or impacts on the P&L in that transition process? I lost the balance. I'm trying to figure out how to internalize that, which is, does it flow through the P&L and the balance? Absolutely, right? When you're diversifying, by definition, it's happening. We're in midstream of sorts, right? There are two sides to the equation, which is one, the actual setting up of manufacturing itself. Martin mentioned some of the balance sheet impacts of that as that flows through of tools and fixtures and jigs and all the things that you do as a part of that process. The hat trick to pull it off is if you wanted, let's say, for any given SKU, I needed 100,000 units in the first half of 2026. This is a bit of the units are coming obviously originally out of China and something that's moving, and then you need the next manufacturing location to pick up and go hand in glove between the two. It is a bit of a hat trick on each SKU to turn it off in China and turn it on in the new location and for the team in the U.S. to not see any difference on the flow into their warehouse in that switch. So far, the team has executed flawlessly, and every time we move a SKU, this thing is happening and you're getting this seamless cutover, so to speak, of the SKUs moving from one location to another. When that happens, you're moving from, in a sense, the China tariff level to the target tariff level, kind of within that construct, and you're also moving from a China FOB, if you want to call it that, to the target FOB. All to say we've got a lot of moving pieces is an understatement, but this is happening at a SKU level each time one of them moves. All of that obviously ripples through the P&L, but the pluses and the minuses as it rolls through that COG line, assuming you keep volume consistent like you wanted. You're not touching that sales, but you are messing with that COG line in the transition. Martin, I don't know if you want to. I'll agree with what Jim said there. You've got a tariff arbitrage. I think everybody's very clear on that. You're coming out of a 30% tariff regime or higher, actually, in China with the existing, coming into a not low, but a lower tariff regime of only 20% or 19%. There's that. When one moves manufacturing, which I think is maybe what you were digging at, Craig, you can sometimes see a cost increase to begin with because the new lines are less efficient or you have higher wastage or quality issues. We're quite pleased with how that's going. The FOB reductions we're pursuing are really around localization. It's around if you're in Indonesia, can you get the parts locally? That will be cheaper than shipping some of those parts from China. There's a localization play going on. The bumpiness from changing location in our case is eased a bit by the fact it's the same suppliers. It's the same partner that we're producing espresso machines in Indonesia with that we're producing in China. You don't have that risk of new unknown supplier. As Jim says, a lot of moving parts. Yes, as we move, we get price changes and then we look to optimize those price changes going forward. That's one of our mitigants. Yeah, okay, that's quite clear and yeah, I understand some of those ripple effects that you're talking about or the hat trick. Just on the FOB, like is China costs coming down? I'm probably asking that more for the other rest of the world, not U.S., but is that cost coming down as well? We're buying from the same plants that we would from before. We're seeing it as an overall partner relationship that the prices out of the new plants, the prices out of the old plants. We're not driving down prices out of China at this stage. There may be some if utilization goes down, but that's not a key feature of my mitigant list at the moment, Craig. I mean, in 2025, there was a small nick to that. Like right at the beginning, like right when the Trump administration went with whatever it was, 10% or whatever it was, the first lever was obviously to go back to your manufacturers and that would have been out of China. They came to the party in that first step. After that first step, they're done, right? Now you're moving on to doing it through actual work. I think, Craig, the biggest prize is having the new plants in Indonesia and Mexico up and running efficient and getting localization through those new plants. That's probably the biggest prize that we're chasing. Thanks, Martin. Thanks, Jim. Thank you. Your next question comes from Paul Segal from UBS. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, Jim and Martin. Question from me. Just on the report announcement file, page five, you've talked about expecting significant cost increases in both FY2026 and FY2027 for the US business. Obviously, 2026 is pretty understandable. I was just wondering why FY2027 specifically was called out for a further step up in costs. I'm going to jump in on that one. Not a further step up. I think what we were contrasting, Paul, was if we go all the way back to February, there was some kind of hope that by moving out of China, one would be moving into a zero tariff location. You've circumvented the tariff by moving from a tariff location into a zero tariff. Obviously, Indonesia and Mexico, not so much, but Indonesia has some existing tariffs on it now. That cost step up, that 20% tariff and 19% lives with you in FY2026. In FY2027, it doesn't magically go away as you step into FY2027. We're not calling it a second step upward. It's like step up and hold and then manage normally. Okay. Of that, the 65% of the 120-volt production that's now outside of China, is the mix tilted towards Southeast Asia more so than Mexico? How do you think of the country-by-country mix of that 65% now? I mean, look, this is a moving target, right? In the sense of it's SKU by SKU by SKU, but I would say it would mix, I mean, I'm doing this just in my head, it would mix more towards Southeast Asia right now. Yeah. Yeah. I would say the initial round one will mix towards Southeast Asia, and then Mexico will scale as a% on a more medium-term basis, I guess would be the way to say it. By the time we get to the end of 2026, Mexico. End of 2026, Mexico will be standing much taller than it is today. Yes. Brilliant. Thanks, guys. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sam Haddad from Petra Capital. Please go ahead. Hi, Jim. Hi, Martin. I just want to ask a question on China. I know it's still early days, but can you sort of talk about what you've seen in terms of more clearly around the metrics you're seeing? Compared to the early, what you observed with South Korea in its early days in ramp-up, is it sort of comparable? Is there any resemblance to that in terms of conversion, average order value, red traffic, just the level of conversion, and also just the speed of ramp-up? Is it tracking above your expectations? Just some more color around that, please. Thank you. Yeah. I mean, Sam, to be fair, you're talking about two months of data, right? The real trick when you go into a new market is, are you getting dial tone? When someone places an order, can you ship it? The opposite of the equation is, does it work or did something blow up? The test in a sense is, do you know, is that all working and are you where you need to be and all those things? I think the China team executed exceptionally well, as did the Korea team. Two months in, I'd say they're doing great. I can't really give you a point of view on expectations because I didn't have any. My expectation was we would have dial tone and these guys would be live and off to the races. I think it is doing well. I'm trying to figure out how to judge this thing, which is they did great getting in and they've come out well, I guess is the way to describe it. There are no surprises. It is doing exactly what we thought it would do all of two months in. From an accountant's point of view, I'll give you a double negative damages. I've seen nothing that worries me. I have no new, I have no bad news that's changed my optimism about China. It's going to be a big market. Early days, as Jim said, and a little bit back to Sean's question, we're building for the medium term in China, and yes, it should be a very significant market for us. How many online platforms are you now live on, what's the pipeline, and how much of your, obviously, you're now online? I think it's three or four. I don't know. I have a slide in the deck and it literally shows the four. I think it's whatever, T-Mall, JD. Anyway, you can see it on the slide. It's where we want to be and where we need to be, the best way to describe it. I would say the launch portfolio was what we wanted it to be. They will continue, as does Korea, to get new SKUs to expand the range, but we launched with exactly what we wanted. For example, the Oracle Jet would not be in Korea yet, would not be in China yet. That will feel like MPD to those markets when we choose to take it in. It was MPD in the global market in FY2025, but it will feel like MPD in China and Korea when we extend the range. Right. Thank you. Thank you. Your next question comes from Olivia Coulon from ENP. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi guys. Thanks for taking my question. Just maybe dig into that FOB piece and your discussion, Martin, about localization. I think one of your listed USPs that has been growing pretty rapidly and is probably a little bit ahead in terms of moving 120-volt production out of China. Now, they've been on record as saying that their realized FOB outside of China, and this was pre-tariff impact, was now below what they were paying in China. Is that your expectation long term? I suppose what's the kind of situation currently with the level of fairly nascent localization initiatives? Yes, can you end up with a lower FOB outside of China than inside of China? The answer is yes. There's work to do to get there because you have to do the, you've got to pass substantial transformation, which is what you would describe as a minimum level of localization. As you push more localization through, you can drive that cost down. There's a labor arbitrage as well, depending upon which country you're talking about. You absolutely can get to a run rate outside of China that's lower than your run rate inside of China. Yeah. That's just what we're working on. It's a lot of work. It doesn't happen in a day. No, I understand. Presumably, your Chinese partners are actively trying to find, you know, component manufacturers that can meet the quality and, you know, spec requirements for their inputs. Is that kind of the challenge? Right. The beauty for us is it's the same partner. Yeah. Right. The great news is, you know, we all meet together to decide, all right, what are we going to do to meet substantial transformation? Our team and their team are working together to requalify some suppliers within that construct, both geographically, locally, as well as otherwise. All of that, if you just keep going, that's the thing that ultimately drives you to a point where you can be at parity or better outside of China. Yeah. No, I appreciate that. Just on your discussion on channel optimization, I suppose in the US, because there obviously is a fair spread of realized GP margin between your most profitable channels and your least profitable channels. Maybe in terms of flesh out the opportunity there to kind of mitigate some of the tariff impact as you're a little bit more selective as to who gets which SKUs and weight of SKUs as well. It is just a lever, right? What I try to help everybody understand is, I was at a meeting earlier this week, I call it the Aussie bias, which is there's an Aussie bias, which is there's only one lever you pull and it's price. Because it's a duopoly, you can do that and everything will be great. In north of the equator, there are lots of levers to pull. I think everybody is working across the entire value chain. There are FOB levers, you can adjust distribution, you can touch price. There is a whole bunch of levers you pull and there is no silver bullet within that model. It is really what mix of all of this, depending on the SKU, depending on its current channel, depending on what you believe about its elasticity. This is literally a game that happens at the SKU by SKU by SKU level. What you're trying to do, given the whatever step up in consumption tax or whatever that is, is to relay this individual SKU into its optimized position to optimize gross profit on a go-forward basis. You get a very different answer from one SKU versus another, given all of these variables in play. Yeah. Just on the price front, I'm showing the Aussie bias here. You know, are you also taking price through more selective, you know, discounting and promotions with your partner? That's another lever, right? I'll tell you, you can leave price. Let's say, I'm making this up, we're not terribly promotive, but if I pick on one SKU, you could, if this SKU was on sale every three weeks last year at 50% off, if you left the SKU right where it was and instead you did 20% off two times a year, guess what? You just raised average price. That is another lever that's available, especially if you're a very promoted brand. You just don't go as deep or as often and you'll end up with the same endpoint, but you won't see a change in the headline price. Another lever on the table that all the players can play with. Yeah, because I suppose, you know, you're like, I can kind of consider you a key competitor in the U.S. market for semi-automation machines, you know, to still be DeLonghi. They have had a bit of a record in the past of, you know, potentially maybe not being as strategic on their discounting kind of initiatives. Have you seen a little bit more? I'm not going to judge. I don't want to judge their strategy, which is they have theirs, I have mine, right? I'm not here to tell them how to do theirs. I'm not writing their fact base, right? What I can tell you, at least as to, and now we're really just focused on the U.S., which is as of right now, as a general rule, DeLonghi has not changed price on products that you would define as competitive with Breville. They have taken price on other SKUs, but not the ones in our particular space. Their strategy there is to play through. I have no idea what they're doing in promotional windows and whether they go deeper or not or, you know, kind of whatever it is. I think everybody has a unique kind of footprint, if you want to call it that, both as how much is the U.S. as a percent of your total. How big is the problem you're dealing with in the first place, right? If you're Cuisinart, it's a big number. If you're DeLonghi, it's a smaller number. Does it feel more like Brexit or, you know, whatever it is on a roll-up? That gives you different degrees of freedom in how you think about playing and what you do. Yeah. I don't think there's a right, I guess it's said a different way. There's a right answer for each company. There's no right answer that gets applied across all of them and saying this is the right answer, right? I think it really comes down company by company, SKU by SKU, channel by channel, supplier by supplier of what's the right answer for this particular company in that SKU. Then you add it all up and you've got the portfolio answer. What one doesn't want to be doing is taking price up and then discounting it down to the same original discount price during promotional periods. You can. You are training consumers to come to that period. All of this could be the right answer for one of our competitors. That could be exactly the thing they should do, right? We've got our own strategy. This is also a difference in what is your market share position of a particular category inside this country and how does that change how you think about playing. All I'm trying to suggest to everyone is there is no silver bullet. It's a game that gets played at the SKU level by everyone based on their position and how it rolls up and what's right for them. I'm not here to suggest that DeLonghi isn't playing it perfectly for them. They sure may be. We better move through to the next question, Olivia. Thank you. Yeah, thanks. Thank you. As a reminder, we ask all participants to please limit their questions to one per turn. If you have any further questions, you'll need to rejoin the queue. Your next question comes from Tim Lawson from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hi guys, thanks for taking my question. Just in terms of, can you comment on sell-in, sell-out? Obviously, you've called out what you've seen in your inventory, but what have retailers done across this sort of period in terms of stock levels and specifically the move into sort of higher margin channels and whether that's had an impact as well? I didn't get the last part of your question. Whether the shift into higher margin channels has had any impact around that sell-in, sell-out. Oh, in the US. In 2025, sell-in and sell-out was clean. I think as a general rule, it got a little messy after Liberation Day in the sense of we're pulling inventory and so forth. I would say it went through, as I was looking through March, April, May, because we pulled inventory, I'd say those three months were clean as well. Meaning because we had the inventory, we and our retail partners could kind of work through those months as if it didn't happen is maybe a way to describe it. Sell-in, sell-out was good. When I came around, let's call it July 1, everybody was, the channel was right where we would want it and I think where they would want to be from an inventory position. There was no real, nothing of. Nothing really to call out. No, there's no call out. Apart from the two distributor changeovers in India and China that we mentioned. Yeah, you're going to get headwinds on that one. Yeah, but I think sell-in, sell-out was clean across theater. I mean, I look at this result, it feels like FY2019 to me. Like it's just, there's not much that's remarkable. It's kind of amazing given Liberation Day forward of all the, you know, how crazy that we were busy, but when you look at the print, it looks pretty boring. Thanks. Martin, specifically on your comment on China and Middle East impact with that change in distribution arrangement, could you just maybe talk about how important those markets were as third-party models? How important they were as what, Tim? Just say again, please. As third-party distributor models. Oh, they were enough that if you look at second half growths in EMEA and APAC, they look a little bit softer than first half growths. That's what's doing that. That's why we called it out. Actually, the main countries were pretty steady first half, second half, and sell-in, sell-out was pretty well matched. We called those two out because it was big enough to dampen the numbers. Overall, 11.5% constant currency growth for the year, we're looking at that and we're very happy with that. I mean, Tim might say every time you do one of those change-outs, it's always at the margin. Yeah, that's fine. Thanks very much. Thanks for taking my questions. Thank you. Your next question comes from Weiweng Chen from RBC Capital Management. Please go ahead. Hey guys, congrats on the good result. Just a question from me on, I guess, looking at your competitors and where Breville Group are right now from a supply chain perspective, do you think you guys are at a relative advantage or disadvantage relative to your competitors as it relates to the U.S. tariffs and where they stand right now? I'll be honest, this is at a tactics level, right? I think everybody gets to the same endpoint. Let's talk about major companies. I think now we're just debating time, right? I don't think anybody's playing games of like, gosh, I got a whole month ahead of you, and that's going to make me make a different change, right? It doesn't happen that way. It's a much slower construct. I wouldn't define it as, I don't think anybody's going to have a structural advantage if you want to call it that because we're all going to get to the same place. Now it's just a function of how quickly did you get there. What's the headwind or tailwind in a sense that you're feeling? When are you going to print a clean P&L post all changes, right? I think each company will have its date when to say, oh, we're done. I don't think that it's going to create any change in how people are behaving on the shelf is my guess. I could be wrong, but. I'd agree with that. It's so short term. It's not a. Yeah, I don't think people are taking price to mitigate short-term month-on-month sourcing advantages. They're doing it because of the longer-term impact of the reciprocal tariffs. I don't know who's a few months ahead or a few months behind. I think the only thing that's theoretically structural, and we'll see where this whole thing lands in the end, is if you think about the, let's call them, manufacturers in China that were just shooting from China into the U.S., meaning not what you would call major players on the shelf, their FOB went up. As a group, they are slightly less, and they are in a structurally disadvantaged position against all of the bigger players that were able to, in a sense, optimize the supply chain because they can't leave. I think you have that little structural long-term effect, but beyond that, I would expect all of the major players to ultimately end up in a similar position. Thank you. I guess just more broadly, it feels like you're juggling a lot of balls right now operationally. Things are happening at the country level, the SKU level. How do you manage a business under these conditions and make sure you're not dropping any balls? I mean, honestly, if this was our first rodeo, I'd worry about it. We did this with Brexit. I would say this feels, the way I'd describe it is, on the one hand, this feels like Brexit because it's one country. It feels like COVID because you don't know what the White House is going to do next week. There's a lot of whacking around. We've all been through this before. I think what you end up doing is the same thing we did in COVID, which is you're very clear in the separation between, let's call it the tactical against the strategic. All of these balls that are getting juggled, I mean, if you had my COO on the other end of this one, he'd be pulling his hair out. If you had NPD, they'd say, I don't know what you're talking about because we're just working on the next product and off you go. You try to kind of separate the, let's call it the real-time side of the organization from the steady as she goes side so that it doesn't infect across. To be fair, this ops team has gone through much worse over the last five years. Cool. Thanks so much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Sam Tega from Citi. Please go ahead. Hi, Jim. Hi, Martin. When we look at your recent innovation in coffee, you've got the dual boiler at $4,500, the Oracle Jet in the mid-$3,000s. Is it reasonable for us to read into this as Breville is trying to premiumize its brand? That also might have the indirect benefit of you having less competitive overlap with Shark Ninja, which I guess would be sensible. It'd be good to get your thoughts on this topic. You made some acquisition of some exclusive license for some bespoke product IP. Is this in the coffee category or another category? Thank you. On the first one, I wouldn't read anything into it. What I mean by that is we play, we've always had the Oracle Touch. You know, the Oracle Touch was launched, I don't know, 12 years ago, 10 years ago, whatever it is. We've got the Bambino, you know, kind of all the way at the bottom. What we try to do is meet our customers where they're at, from, you know, let's call it in premium entry, like we are a premium brand. Premium entry kind of all the way up and down the chain. If you look at the stuff that was launched, you know, whatever, two years ago, three years ago, four years ago, you'll see it's up and down, going after another, let's call it subsegment, trying to optimize against the subsegment. This is just what came off the line, I guess, is the way to describe it. I think what you will see is that we tend to, if we're going to push tech, a step change in technical capability, that tends to happen first at the upper end of the range because you've got more headroom, and you're not counting pennies within that construct. It's a little bit easier to do step changes at the top, before you roll, so to speak. I wouldn't read into anything strategically. On the IP, it's not something I want to talk about. Will eventually. Your job to ask and mine to say no. We're excited about it. Looking forward to hearing more in time. Thank you. Yes. Yeah.